From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-x22c.google.com (mail-wg0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22c]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 836B56931 for ; Fri, 24 May 2013 17:45:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id a12so2775469wgh.23 for ; Fri, 24 May 2013 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=from:organization:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references :in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :message-id:x-gm-message-state; bh=OcQeazHfUhnI6OXbrTyATm9DnxJ79S4PjG3jgb+gez8=; b=GD7V7RXFctPMCSBKIRsgU+Pl0KlIHYCM3D22V+MhMw+FtMCOTaq6rzWPWg6ww0G9pk creH++t6rIv6TogpzGAmSSXmfKaK1CqcrI6Q0cJWErvygkh+yh1AE130GKJ51ujlXRDD lSOz6QLJT7jgZcpidU93bdAjN1XjY8p+elOcRpOj5P/Bio0oRvieumQORnJi73k8qqOQ mEcXxxVzMePwLWk9NWzePWeWE5VaDa+QEZxjjjD/w8/8YTc0/gZWII45dPouI0RTS06M TZEpaaIF68lUtZSp4xZx/mjTRsDZgf9UlvzJEKD8Oc4uZpAbjZ26PtyZ6SlkQVYer7wa QdgA== X-Received: by 10.194.63.140 with SMTP id g12mr148246wjs.13.1369410325116; Fri, 24 May 2013 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from angus.localnet (6wind.net2.nerim.net. [213.41.180.237]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ay7sm43125310wib.9.2013.05.24.08.45.23 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 24 May 2013 08:45:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon Organization: 6WIND To: Patrick Mahan Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 17:45:25 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.2.0-4-amd64; KDE/4.8.4; x86_64; ; ) References: <519F74F6.3000903@mahan.org> <201305241641.38896.thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> In-Reply-To: <201305241641.38896.thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201305241745.25844.thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmfXS/pCU5oqcnjtu6VxNSVkpCRHbdCYaHNOgnsriU3QGKqS40KA/ujUr6QzlftrsiAVRgO Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Best example for showing throughput? X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 15:45:20 -0000 Adding other questions about packet generator: 24/05/2013 16:41, Thomas Monjalon : > 24/05/2013 16:11, Patrick Mahan : > > Intel Xeon E5-2690 (8 physical, 16 virtual) > > How many CPU sockets have you ? > > > 64 Gbyte DDR3 memory > > Intel 82599EB-SPF dual port 10GE interface > > CentOS 6.4 (2.6.32-358.6.1.el6.x86_64) > > The 82599 is in a 16x PCI-e slot. > > Check the datasheet of your motherboard. > Are you sure it is wired as a 16x PCI-e ? > Is it connected to the right NUMA node ? > > > I have it attached to an IXIA box. Which packet size are you sending with your packet generator ? In case of 64 byte packets (with Ethernet CRC), (64+20)*8 = 672 bits. So line rate is 10000/672 = 14.88 Mpps. This bandwith should be supported by your 82599 NIC. Are you sending and receiving on the 2 ports at the same time ? Forwarding in the 2 directions is equivalent to double the bandwidth. Maybe that 14.88*2 = 29.76 Mpps is too much for your hardware. You could also try with 2 ports on 2 different NICs. > > I have been running the app 'testpmd' > > in iofwd mode with 2K rx/tx descriptors and 512 burst/mbcache. I have > > been varying the # of queues and unfortunately, I am not seeing full > > line rate. > > What is your command line ? > > > I am seeing about 20-24% droppage on the receive side. It doesn't seem > > to matter the # of queues. > > If queues are polled by different cores, it should matter. > > > Question 1: Is 'testpmd' the best application for this type of testing? > > If not, which program? Or do I need to roll my own? > > testpmd is the right application for performance benchmark. > It is also possible to use examples l2fwd/l3fwd but you should keep > testpmd. > > > Question 2: I have blacklisted the Intel i350 ports on the motherboard > > and am using ssh to access the platform. Could this be affecting the > > test? > > You mean i350 is used for ssh ? It shouldn't significantly affect your > test. -- Thomas